How Leaky Is the Health Career Pipeline? Minority Student Achievement in College Gateway Courses
Abstract
Purpose To determine whether underrepresented minority (URM) students receive lower grades than do non-URM students in college prehealth gateway courses; the extent to which lower grade performance might be explained by the differences in precollege academic achievement; and whether URM students are less likely than non-URM students to persist in completing at least four gateway courses. Method Administrative data were obtained from six California colleges on 15,000 college students who matriculated in the 1999-2000 or 2000-2001 academic years and enrolled in at least one college course required for application to medical or dental school ("gateway" courses). Students were compared across ethnic groups in gateway course grade performance and persistence in completing at least four gateway courses, using regression methods to control for students' college admission test scores and caliber of high school attended. Results URM students received significantly lower grades on average in gateway courses than did white students. This gap persisted after adjusting for measures of prior academic performance. However, URM students were nearly as likely as white students to persist in completing at least four gateway courses. After accounting for the lower grades of URM students in their initial classes, URM students were more likely than white students to complete four or more gateway courses. Conclusions URM students experienced academic challenges, but many persist in their prehealth…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The boost from active learning could be disproportionately beneficial for students from MGS even if average grades are still low, because URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent on average than non-URMs.
“The boost could be disproportionately beneficial for students from MGS even if average grades are still low, because URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs (11, 40).”
From Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs.
“URM students in STEM are less grade-sensitive and more persistent, on average, than non-URMs (11, 40).”
From Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math (2020) · cites this paper as [11]
Considerable leakage of underrepresented minorities occurs after the first and second-year undergraduate gateway science courses.
“Rather, the considerable leakage of URMs after the first and second-year undergraduate gateway science courses”
STEM majors have longer time-to-degree completion rates compared to non-STEM majors.
“and the longer time-to-degree completion rates for STEM compared to non-STEM majors indicate a need for earlier, pre-college interventions [6], [8], [9].”
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., Cintrón, D. L., Cooper, J. D., Dunster, G., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1916903117 · Cited by 1,387 · see citing works
“Underrepresentation occurs because URM and low-income students experience achievement gaps—examination scores that are lower on average than their overrepresented peers in “gateway” STEM courses, along with failure rates that are higher (11, 12).”
BackgroundSalto, L. M., Riggs, M. L., Delgado De Leon, D., Casiano, C. A., & De Leon, M. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108497 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Differences in Coaching Needs Among Underrepresented Minority Medical Students
Najibi, S., Carney, P. A., Thayer, E. K., & Deiorio, N. M. (2019) · Family Medicine · doi:10.22454/fammed.2019.100305 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
- Authors
- Alexander, C., Chen, E., & Grumbach, K.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Corresponding author
- Alexander, Charles
- ORCID
- Grumbach, Kevin
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-06
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 797-802
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043729990
- Cited by
- 115
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 5.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- San Francisco State University
- California Endowment
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Keywords
- underrepresented minority students, achievement gap, grade performance, student persistence, medical school diversity
- MeSH terms
- California, Career Choice, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Education, Premedical, Educational Measurement, Female, Health Occupations, Humans, Male, Minority Groups, Predictive Value of Tests, School Admission Criteria, Schools, Dental, Schools, Medical, Student Dropouts, Universities, Databases, Factual, Cultural Diversity, Needs Assessment, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review